Related
I have declared a variable in one module like this:
// first.js
var folder;
export {folder};
and I want to use it from a different module, like this:
// second.js
import { folder} from '../js/first.js';
folder = gui.addFolder( 'Avatar Measurements' );`
TypeError: Assignment to constant variable.
Imports are read-only live bindings to the original variable in the exporting module. The "read-only" part means you can't directly modify them. The "live" part means that you can see any modifications made to them by the exporting module.
If you have a module that needs to allow other modules to modify the values of its exports (which is/should be rare), it needs to export a function that does that. For instance:
a.js:
export let folder;
export function setFolder(f) {
folder = f;
}
b.js:
import { folder, setFolder } from "./a.js";
console.log(folder); // This will be `undefined` unless another module has already modified it
setFolder(gui.addFolder("Avatar Measurements"));
console.log(folder); // This will be whatever `gui.addFolder` returns
Again, though, it is/should be very rare for a module to allow other modules to modify its exports that way.
In the comments you asked me for an example of exporting an object for this instead:
a.js:
export let shapes = {};
b.js:
import { shapes } from "./a.js";
shape.folder = gui.addFolder("Avatar Measurements");
But it's not clear to me why that object needs to live in a rather than just being local in b.
That happens because you are creating a folder constant when importing folder from ../js/first.js. You cannot reassign a value to any constant, including folder. Don't use == or ===, as those are comparasion operators and don't change the value of folder.
If you want to pass information from second.js to first.js, consider exporting a function from second.js. If you don't, then use another name for a variable, like folder_ (don't forget to declare it first: var folder_;).
This is b.js
var something = "hooorraaaaay!!!";
And this is a.js
require( './b.js' );
console.log(something);
Why isn't something being recognised within a.js. I understand that it has been declared with var, but my understanding is that any variable declared outside a function should act global. So why isn't this working?
Node modules are each in their own scope. By default, nothing in module a is visible to module b. Doing a require() on a module is NOT like including the source. It loads the file runs the code and then the only things that are available to the outside world are:
Any functions or properties that are explicitly exported from the module by assigning to module.exports.
Any functions or properties that are explicitly assigned to the global object in node.
So, if you want something in b.js to be exposed to the outside world, you do like this:
// b.js
module.exports.callMe = function() {
console.log("I'm in module b");
}
And, then in a.js, you can do this:
// a.js
var b = require('./b.js');
b.callMe();
This is how the module system works in node.js. It is very different than just including a <script> tag in a browser web page. You can read more about the module system in these references:
Understanding module.exports and exports in Node.js
What is the purpose of Node.js module.exports and how do you use it?
Node.js Handbook - How require() Actually Works
Internally, node.js loads a module's code and then inserts it into a wrapper function. So, each top level variable in a node module is actually only a local variable in that module function. This is why nothing is globally declared or shared by default. It is done this way on purpose so that each module comes with it's own private area for storing it's state and will not, by default, interfere with the variables of any other module.
You then explicitly export only the property/function interfaces that you want to make public and even then, they are still not exported as public symbols so again they cannot conflict with anything else.
So, the b.js code above actually gets transformed into this when node.js runs it:
(function (exports, module, require, __filename, __dirname){
module.exports.callMe = function() {
console.log("I'm in module b");
}
})(...);
The (...) contains actual variables that are passed to the module.
Let me assume you are using node.js judging from the require function.
node.js wraps each file in its own scope. this has nothing to do with the use of var keyword. every file in node.js is called a module.
Now let's say you want to include a module, here comes require, you have used it right.
But since your module doesn't export anything, it's useless when it's included in some other module.
So at the end of your b.js file, add the following line :
module.exports.something = something;
Now we can finally use our exported variable :
var b = require('./b.js');
console.log('Something is : ' + b.something);
What is the purpose of Node.js module.exports and how do you use it?
I can't seem to find any information on this, but it appears to be a rather important part of Node.js as I often see it in source code.
According to the Node.js documentation:
module
A reference to the current
module. In particular module.exports
is the same as the exports object. See
src/node.js for more information.
But this doesn't really help.
What exactly does module.exports do, and what would a simple example be?
module.exports is the object that's actually returned as the result of a require call.
The exports variable is initially set to that same object (i.e. it's a shorthand "alias"), so in the module code you would usually write something like this:
let myFunc1 = function() { ... };
let myFunc2 = function() { ... };
exports.myFunc1 = myFunc1;
exports.myFunc2 = myFunc2;
to export (or "expose") the internally scoped functions myFunc1 and myFunc2.
And in the calling code you would use:
const m = require('./mymodule');
m.myFunc1();
where the last line shows how the result of require is (usually) just a plain object whose properties may be accessed.
NB: if you overwrite exports then it will no longer refer to module.exports. So if you wish to assign a new object (or a function reference) to exports then you should also assign that new object to module.exports
It's worth noting that the name added to the exports object does not have to be the same as the module's internally scoped name for the value that you're adding, so you could have:
let myVeryLongInternalName = function() { ... };
exports.shortName = myVeryLongInternalName;
// add other objects, functions, as required
followed by:
const m = require('./mymodule');
m.shortName(); // invokes module.myVeryLongInternalName
This has already been answered but I wanted to add some clarification...
You can use both exports and module.exports to import code into your application like this:
var mycode = require('./path/to/mycode');
The basic use case you'll see (e.g. in ExpressJS example code) is that you set properties on the exports object in a .js file that you then import using require()
So in a simple counting example, you could have:
(counter.js):
var count = 1;
exports.increment = function() {
count++;
};
exports.getCount = function() {
return count;
};
... then in your application (web.js, or really any other .js file):
var counting = require('./counter.js');
console.log(counting.getCount()); // 1
counting.increment();
console.log(counting.getCount()); // 2
In simple terms, you can think of required files as functions that return a single object, and you can add properties (strings, numbers, arrays, functions, anything) to the object that's returned by setting them on exports.
Sometimes you'll want the object returned from a require() call to be a function you can call, rather than just an object with properties. In that case you need to also set module.exports, like this:
(sayhello.js):
module.exports = exports = function() {
console.log("Hello World!");
};
(app.js):
var sayHello = require('./sayhello.js');
sayHello(); // "Hello World!"
The difference between exports and module.exports is explained better in this answer here.
Note that the NodeJS module mechanism is based on CommonJS modules which are supported in many other implementations like RequireJS, but also SproutCore, CouchDB, Wakanda, OrientDB, ArangoDB, RingoJS, TeaJS, SilkJS, curl.js, or even Adobe Photoshop (via PSLib).
You can find the full list of known implementations here.
Unless your module use node specific features or module, I highly encourage you then using exports instead of module.exports which is not part of the CommonJS standard, and then mostly not supported by other implementations.
Another NodeJS specific feature is when you assign a reference to a new object to exports instead of just adding properties and methods to it like in the last example provided by Jed Watson in this thread. I would personally discourage this practice as this breaks the circular reference support of the CommonJS modules mechanism. It is then not supported by all implementations and Jed example should then be written this way (or a similar one) to provide a more universal module:
(sayhello.js):
exports.run = function() {
console.log("Hello World!");
}
(app.js):
var sayHello = require('./sayhello');
sayHello.run(); // "Hello World!"
Or using ES6 features
(sayhello.js):
Object.assign(exports, {
// Put all your public API here
sayhello() {
console.log("Hello World!");
}
});
(app.js):
const { sayHello } = require('./sayhello');
sayHello(); // "Hello World!"
PS: It looks like Appcelerator also implements CommonJS modules, but without the circular reference support (see: Appcelerator and CommonJS modules (caching and circular references))
Some few things you must take care if you assign a reference to a new object to exports and /or modules.exports:
1. All properties/methods previously attached to the original exports or module.exports are of course lost because the exported object will now reference another new one
This one is obvious, but if you add an exported method at the beginning of an existing module, be sure the native exported object is not referencing another object at the end
exports.method1 = function () {}; // exposed to the original exported object
exports.method2 = function () {}; // exposed to the original exported object
module.exports.method3 = function () {}; // exposed with method1 & method2
var otherAPI = {
// some properties and/or methods
}
exports = otherAPI; // replace the original API (works also with module.exports)
2. In case one of exports or module.exports reference a new value, they don't reference to the same object any more
exports = function AConstructor() {}; // override the original exported object
exports.method2 = function () {}; // exposed to the new exported object
// method added to the original exports object which not exposed any more
module.exports.method3 = function () {};
3. Tricky consequence. If you change the reference to both exports and module.exports, hard to say which API is exposed (it looks like module.exports wins)
// override the original exported object
module.exports = function AConstructor() {};
// try to override the original exported object
// but module.exports will be exposed instead
exports = function AnotherConstructor() {};
the module.exports property or the exports object allows a module to select what should be shared with the application
I have a video on module_export available here
When dividing your program code over multiple files, module.exports is used to publish variables and functions to the consumer of a module. The require() call in your source file is replaced with corresponding module.exports loaded from the module.
Remember when writing modules
Module loads are cached, only initial call evaluates JavaScript.
It's possible to use local variables and functions inside a module, not everything needs to be exported.
The module.exports object is also available as exports shorthand. But when returning a sole function, always use module.exports.
According to: "Modules Part 2 - Writing modules".
the refer link is like this:
exports = module.exports = function(){
//....
}
the properties of exports or module.exports ,such as functions or variables , will be exposed outside
there is something you must pay more attention : don't override exports .
why ?
because exports just the reference of module.exports , you can add the properties onto the exports ,but if you override the exports , the reference link will be broken .
good example :
exports.name = 'william';
exports.getName = function(){
console.log(this.name);
}
bad example :
exports = 'william';
exports = function(){
//...
}
If you just want to exposed only one function or variable , like this:
// test.js
var name = 'william';
module.exports = function(){
console.log(name);
}
// index.js
var test = require('./test');
test();
this module only exposed one function and the property of name is private for the outside .
There are some default or existing modules in node.js when you download and install node.js like http, sys etc.
Since they are already in node.js, when we want to use these modules we basically do like import modules, but why? because they are already present in the node.js. Importing is like taking them from node.js and putting them into your program. And then using them.
Whereas Exports is exactly the opposite, you are creating the module you want, let's say the module addition.js and putting that module into the node.js, you do it by exporting it.
Before I write anything here, remember, module.exports.additionTwo is same as exports.additionTwo
Huh, so that's the reason, we do like
exports.additionTwo = function(x)
{return x+2;};
Be careful with the path
Lets say you have created an addition.js module,
exports.additionTwo = function(x){
return x + 2;
};
When you run this on your NODE.JS command prompt:
node
var run = require('addition.js');
This will error out saying
Error: Cannot find module addition.js
This is because the node.js process is unable the addition.js since we didn't mention the path. So, we have can set the path by using NODE_PATH
set NODE_PATH = path/to/your/additon.js
Now, this should run successfully without any errors!!
One more thing, you can also run the addition.js file by not setting the NODE_PATH, back to your nodejs command prompt:
node
var run = require('./addition.js');
Since we are providing the path here by saying it's in the current directory ./ this should also run successfully.
A module encapsulates related code into a single unit of code. When creating a module, this can be interpreted as moving all related functions into a file.
Suppose there is a file Hello.js which include two functions
sayHelloInEnglish = function() {
return "Hello";
};
sayHelloInSpanish = function() {
return "Hola";
};
We write a function only when utility of the code is more than one call.
Suppose we want to increase utility of the function to a different file say World.js,in this case exporting a file comes into picture which can be obtained by module.exports.
You can just export both the function by the code given below
var anyVariable={
sayHelloInEnglish = function() {
return "Hello";
};
sayHelloInSpanish = function() {
return "Hola";
};
}
module.export=anyVariable;
Now you just need to require the file name into World.js inorder to use those functions
var world= require("./hello.js");
The intent is:
Modular programming is a software design technique that emphasizes
separating the functionality of a program into independent,
interchangeable modules, such that each contains everything necessary
to execute only one aspect of the desired functionality.
Wikipedia
I imagine it becomes difficult to write a large programs without modular / reusable code. In nodejs we can create modular programs utilising module.exports defining what we expose and compose our program with require.
Try this example:
fileLog.js
function log(string) { require('fs').appendFileSync('log.txt',string); }
module.exports = log;
stdoutLog.js
function log(string) { console.log(string); }
module.exports = log;
program.js
const log = require('./stdoutLog.js')
log('hello world!');
execute
$ node program.js
hello world!
Now try swapping ./stdoutLog.js for ./fileLog.js.
What is the purpose of a module system?
It accomplishes the following things:
Keeps our files from bloating to really big sizes. Having files with e.g. 5000 lines of code in it are usually real hard to deal with during development.
Enforces separation of concerns. Having our code split up into multiple files allows us to have appropriate file names for every file. This way we can easily identify what every module does and where to find it (assuming we made a logical directory structure which is still your responsibility).
Having modules makes it easier to find certain parts of code which makes our code more maintainable.
How does it work?
NodejS uses the CommomJS module system which works in the following manner:
If a file wants to export something it has to declare it using module.export syntax
If a file wants to import something it has to declare it using require('file') syntax
Example:
test1.js
const test2 = require('./test2'); // returns the module.exports object of a file
test2.Func1(); // logs func1
test2.Func2(); // logs func2
test2.js
module.exports.Func1 = () => {console.log('func1')};
exports.Func2 = () => {console.log('func2')};
Other useful things to know:
Modules are getting cached. When you are loading the same module in 2 different files the module only has to be loaded once. The second time a require() is called on the same module the is pulled from the cache.
Modules are loaded in synchronous. This behavior is required, if it was asynchronous we couldn't access the object retrieved from require() right away.
ECMAScript modules - 2022
From Node 14.0 ECMAScript modules are no longer experimental and you can use them instead of classic Node's CommonJS modules.
ECMAScript modules are the official standard format to package JavaScript code for reuse. Modules are defined using a variety of import and export statements.
You can define an ES module that exports a function:
// my-fun.mjs
function myFun(num) {
// do something
}
export { myFun };
Then, you can import the exported function from my-fun.mjs:
// app.mjs
import { myFun } from './my-fun.mjs';
myFun();
.mjs is the default extension for Node.js ECMAScript modules.
But you can configure the default modules extension to lookup when resolving modules using the package.json "type" field, or the --input-type flag in the CLI.
Recent versions of Node.js fully supports both ECMAScript and CommonJS modules. Moreover, it provides interoperability between them.
module.exports
ECMAScript and CommonJS modules have many differences but the most relevant difference - to this question - is that there are no more requires, no more exports, no more module.exports
In most cases, the ES module import can be used to load CommonJS modules.
If needed, a require function can be constructed within an ES module using module.createRequire().
ECMAScript modules releases history
Release
Changes
v15.3.0, v14.17.0, v12.22.0
Stabilized modules implementation
v14.13.0, v12.20.0
Support for detection of CommonJS named exports
v14.0.0, v13.14.0, v12.20.0
Remove experimental modules warning
v13.2.0, v12.17.0
Loading ECMAScript modules no longer requires a command-line flag
v12.0.0
Add support for ES modules using .js file extension via package.json "type" field
v8.5.0
Added initial ES modules implementation
You can find all the changelogs in Node.js repository
let test = function() {
return "Hello world"
};
exports.test = test;
I have been reading about this topic for several hours and just haven't found anything to help make this stick.
a module is just an object in node with a few properties, one is an exports property that references an object.
the 'exports' variable is
var exports = module.exports
It is a var pointing to the object that module.exports is referencing.
What I am struggling with is visualize what the module is. I know it's an object, but is there only one?
I know this isn't the exact way node implements a module but I am visualizing it looking something like this:
var module = {}
module.exports = {}
// now module has a property module.exports
var exports = module.exports
Now, from everything I have been reading, if you were to assign something to module.export = 'xyz'
It would hold the value 'xyz'. Does it lose the original object? On top of that, if I assigned something else to module.exports in the same file, would it be replaced with the new value?
EX:
// file = app.js
module.export = 'hello'
module.export = 'bye'
// file = newApp.js
require(./app);
what is the value of the module? Am I overriding the same module object or are there multiple?
Before we continue, it's important that you understand how modules are actually loaded by node.
The key thing to take away from node's module loading system is that before it actually runs the code you require (which happens in Module#_compile), it creates a new, empty exports object as a property of the Module. (In other words, your visualization is correct.)
Node then wraps the text in the required file with an anonymous function:
(function (exports, require, module, __filename, __dirname) {
// here goes what's in your js file
});
...and essentially evals that string. The result of evaling that string is a function (the anonymous wrapper one), and node immediately invokes the function, passing in the parameters like this:
evaledFn(module.exports, require, module, filename, dirname);
require, filename, and dirname are a reference to the require function (which actually isn't a global), and strings containing the loaded module's path information. (This is what the docs mean when they say "__filename isn't actually a global but rather local to each module.")
So we can see that inside a module, indeed exports === module.exports. But why do modules get both a module and a exports?
Backward compatibility. In the very early days of node, there was no module variable inside of modules. You simply assigned to exports. However, this meant you could never export a constructor function as the module itself.
A familiar example of a module exporting a constructor function as the module:
var express = require('express');
var app = express();
This works because Express exports a function by reassigning module.exports, overwriting the empty object that node gives you by default:
module.exports = function() { ... }
However, note that you can't just write:
exports = function { ... }
This is because JavaScript's parameter passing semantics are weird. Technically, JavaScript might be considered "pure pass-by-value," but in reality parameters are passed "reference-by-value".
This means that you when you pass an object to a function, it receives a reference to that object as a value. You can access the original object through that reference, but you cannot change the caller's perception of the reference. In other words, there's no such thing as an "out" param like you might see in C/C++/C#.
As a concrete example:
var obj = { x: 1 };
function A(o) {
o.x = 2;
}
function B(o) {
o = { x: 2 };
}
Calling A(obj); will result in obj.x == 2, because we access the original object passed in as o. However, B(obj); will do nothing; obj.x == 1. Assigning a completely new object to B's local o only changes what o points to. It does nothing to the caller's object obj, which remains unaffected.
Now it should be obvious why it was thus necessary to add the module object to node modules' local scope. In order to allow a module to completely replace the exports object, it must be available as the property an object passed in to the module anonymous function. And obviously no one wanted to break existing code, so exports was left as a reference to module.exports.
So when you're just assigning properties to your exports object, it doesn't matter whether you use exports or module.exports; they are one and the same, a reference pointing to the exact same object.
It's only when you want to export a function as the top-level export where you must use module.exports, because as we've seen, simply assigning a function to exports would have no effect outside of the module scope.
As a final note, when you are exporting a function as the module, it's a good practice to assign to both exports and module.exports. That way, both variables remain consistent and work the same as they do in a standard module.
exports = module.exports = function() { ... }
Be sure to do this near the top of your module file, so that no one accidentally assigns to an exports that ends up getting overwritten.
Also, if that looks strange to you (three =s?), I'm taking advantage of the fact that an expression containing the assignment operator returns the assigned value, which makes it possible to assign a single value to multiple variables in one shot.
You're overriding the module — exports is a single object gets pulled in with require. Typically, when doing this kind of modular JavaScript using require, your export will be a constructor rather than a primitive like a string in your example. That way, you can create new instances of functionality that's defined in the module. Example:
// module.js
var MyConstructor = function(prop) {
this.prop = prop;
});
module.exports = MyConstructor;
// app.js
var MyConstructor = require('module');
var instance = new MyConstructor('test');
console.log(instance.prop) // 'test'
Modules in Node.js are just files. Each file is a module and each module is a file. If you have more than one file, you can have more than one module (one in each file).
As per module.exports: the Node.js API documentation will shed some light on the topic:
The module.exports object is created by the Module system. Sometimes
this is not acceptable; many want their module to be an instance of
some class. To do this assign the desired export object to
module.exports. Note that assigning the desired object to exports will
simply rebind the local exports variable, which is probably not what
you want to do.
and
The exports variable that is available within a module starts as a
reference to module.exports. As with any variable, if you assign a new
value to it, it is no longer bound to the previous value. ... As a guideline,
if the relationship between exports and module.exports
seems like magic to you, ignore exports and only use module.exports.
So, what does this all mean? In your particular example, module.exports would be equal to it's last assigned value ('bye').
Looking at a random source file of the express framework for NodeJS, there are two lines of the code that I do not understand (these lines of code are typical of almost all NodeJS files).
/**
* Expose `Router` constructor.
*/
exports = module.exports = Router;
and
/**
* Expose HTTP methods.
*/
var methods = exports.methods = require('./methods');
I understand that the first piece of code allows the rest of the functions in the file to be exposed to the NodeJS app, but I don't understand exactly how it works, or what the code in the line means.
What do exports and module.exports actually mean?
I believe the 2nd piece of code allows the functions in the file to access methods, but again, how exactly does it do this.
Basically, what are these magic words: module and exports?
To be more specific:
module is the global scope variable inside a file.
So if you call require("foo") then :
// foo.js
console.log(this === module); // true
It acts in the same way that window acts in the browser.
There is also another global object called global which you can write and read from in any file you want, but that involves mutating global scope and this is EVIL
exports is a variable that lives on module.exports. It's basically what you export when a file is required.
// foo.js
module.exports = 42;
// main.js
console.log(require("foo") === 42); // true
There is a minor problem with exports on it's own. The _global scope context+ and module are not the same. (In the browser the global scope context and window are the same).
// foo.js
var exports = {}; // creates a new local variable called exports, and conflicts with
// living on module.exports
exports = {}; // does the same as above
module.exports = {}; // just works because its the "correct" exports
// bar.js
exports.foo = 42; // this does not create a new exports variable so it just works
Read more about exports
To expand on Raynos's answer...
exports is basically an alias for module.exports - I recommend just not using it. You can expose methods and properties from a module by setting them on module.exports, as follows:
//file 'module1.js'
module.exports.foo = function () { return 'bar' }
module.exports.baz = 5
Then you get access to it in your code:
var module1 = require('module1')
console.log(module1.foo())
console.log(module1.baz)
You can also override module.exports entirely to simply provide a single object upon require:
//glorp.js
module.exports = function () {
this.foo = function () { return 'bar' }
this.baz = 5
return this // need to return `this` object here
}
Now you've got a nice prototype:
var g1 = new require('glorp')()
console.log(g1.foo())
console.log(g1.baz)
There are myriad other ways to play with module.exports and require. Just remember, require('foo') always returns the same instance even if you call it multiple times.
Note
For the following to work,
var g1 = new require('glorp')()
console.log(g1.foo())
console.log(g1.baz)
this has to be returned in the function that is assigned to module.exports. Otherwise, you'll get a TypeError:
console.log(g1.foo())
^
TypeError: Cannot read property 'foo' of undefined
You can find the best answer in node.js source code.
If someone is requiring your js module,
your script turns into a function by node as follows (see src/node.js).
// require function does this..
(function (exports, require, module, __filename, __dirname) {
... your javascript contents...
});
Node will wrap your script. Then above script will be executed as follows:
//module.js
var args = [self.exports, require, self, filename, dirname];
return compiledWrapper.apply(self.exports, args);
So in your script,
exports is just module.exports.
In your script, you can add something to this exports object (functions..).
require function will return this object. This is node.js's module system (commonJS specification).
But be careful not to modify module.exports. Otherwise your current exports will be meaningless.
module is an object that represents what that particular source file would like to publicly expose. Instead of having something akin to header files in the c/c++ world, you describe what the module exports by defining this object. the node runtime then uses this object to determine what about your module is 'public.'
its a similar concept to exporting functions from a dll in the compiled world. you have to define explicitly what functions can be accessed by the outside world. this helps with encapsulation and lets your organize your libraries in a clean way.
Module's code is wrapped in module.exports (The module, maybe composed by other module).
There are many ways to build a module, but this is one very common (and my personal favorite).
// Dependencies
// const module = require('module');
// Module object
var foo = {}
// Internal property
foo._a = 'a';
// "Public" property
foo.b = 'b';
// Method
foo.fu = function() { return 'fu' };
// Export
module.exports = foo;